On CBS MoneyWatch: Report: Tiger to Pay Wife $60 Million
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 14 of 29:
Next »
« Previous
Not at all...
"Don't you usually write software for the hardware and not invent new hardware for the software?"

Not really. If you look at DOS/Windows over the last couple of decades MS has always tried to target where the hardware will be in two - three years as that is the dev time for a new version of Windows. In other words it makes no sense to write an OS for today's hardware, instead they try to target where the hardware will be when the software is released.

In the past it was a cozy relationship between Intel and MS (wintell) and they could "plan" their respective road maps with little concern about what the competition was doing. With AMD putting pressure on Intel, and Linux pushing MS, both have had to scrap existing plans (Intel killed several P4 CPUs and MS is cutting back Longhorn features.) and deal with the real world of competition.

And don't forget IBM's CPUs. As I said, IBM is supplying the CPUs for the Xbox. In fact, it's a triple core 1+ Ghz. CPU. What has this to do with PCs you ask? Simple, the game developers must have a development platform to build the games on. Current Xbox games are built on Pentium PCs so it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see IBM toss their hat back in the "PC" ring in the very near future. Don't forget, IBM probably knows more about hardware platforms than anyone else and they are primarily a hardware company. wink

It will certainly interesting to see how that plays with Apple. Wouldn't be interesting to have a PC that can run Linux, Windows Longhorn, BSD, UNIX or Mac OSX? Or even all of them with something like VMWare???
Posted by: No_Ax_to_Grind   Posted on: 06/01/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

Actually many folks ARE using AMD64 on LINUX  realitycheck101 | 06/01/04
True, but...  nucrash | 06/01/04
Yes and no...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
That seems a little backwards to me  voska | 06/01/04
The real story  ShadeTree | 06/01/04
Not that simple...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
You forget that....  ShadeTree | 06/01/04
And you forget who IBM is.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
This is the same IBM that ....  ShadeTree | 06/01/04
Yes, they drop the ball here and there, and they are still the biggest.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
Actually Microsoft is the biggest....  ShadeTree | 06/01/04
Shade tree, IBM is #1 in databases, Application servers, IT Services, ...  Plain Logic | 06/01/04
35  Plain Logic | 06/01/04
Not at all...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
Feature Creep  voska | 06/01/04
But, MS gave them a road map.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
Interesting Speculation, but...  bc_bc | 06/01/04
Could be, but...  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
Zerox computers  twostepps | 06/12/04
You last paragraph...  bchesmer | 06/02/04
MS has had plenty of time.  nucrash | 06/01/04
HUH? HArdware *claims* happen daily.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
No Wintel conspiracy this time  jheine | 06/01/04
You missed the not many apps exist part  jjworleyeoe | 06/01/04
Actually Microsoft is the biggest....  ShadeTree | 06/01/04
Nope, afraid not.  No_Ax_to_Grind | 06/01/04
Bringing out 64-bit capabilities does NOT require 4GB of memory  bilbo_z | 06/02/04
Athlon 64 3800+ runs @2.4GHz w/ 512K L2, 3400+ runs @2.2GHz w/ 1MB L2  jbormann | 06/02/04
It's ALL UpHill, The Success Plants are Blooming,,,,,  Oat Mea1 | 06/03/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement

SmartPlanet

Click Here